In a decision approve for publication, the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, sitting en banc, recently reversed its prior holding and held that a debt collection letter does not need to expressly state that the debtor must dispute the validity of the debt in writing under Section 1692g(a)(3) of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA”). See Riccio v. Sentry Credit, Inc., 954 F.3d 582 (3d Cir. 2020).
The Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia recently held that a title insurance company had no duty to defend or indemnify an insured property owner for an issue regarding a shared roadway because the roadway itself was not part of the insured property, and the claim was barred by the survey and parties in possession exceptions. See Tritapoe v. Old Republic Nat’l Title Ins. Co., 2020 WL 1487813 (W. Va. Mar. 23, 2020).
On April 14, 2020, New Jersey Governor Phil Murphy signed into law A-3903/S-2336, which, subject to certain requirements, temporarily allows remote notarizations during the Public Health Emergency and State of Emergency declared by Governor Murphy in Executive Order 103 on March 9, 2020.
The Appellate Court of Connecticut recently held that a lender’s loss under a title insurance policy is limited to the amount paid at a tax sale foreclosure minus the amount of taxes, regardless of what the court in the lender’s own foreclosure action found to be the fair market value. See RCN Capital, LLC v. Chicago Title Insurance Company, 196 Conn. App. 528 (2020).
In response to the growing COVID-19 pandemic, many state governors and legislators have swiftly moved to pass laws—either by executive order (“EO”) or traditional legislative processes—to allow notaries to remotely carry out their duties while maintaining social distancing practices and abiding by stay-at-home orders.
On April 7, 2020, in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, New York Governor Andrew Cuomo signed Executive Order 202.14 (“EO 202.14”) which, among other things, authorizes “remote witnessing” for property conveyances under Article 9 of the New York Real Property Law.
In a split decision, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit recently held that a company that “buys and profits from consumer debts” can be liable under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (the “FDCPA”) even if it does not directly communicate with any consumers. See McAdory v. M.N.S. & Assocs., LLC, 2020 WL 1128813 (9th Cir. Mar. 9, 2020).
On March 28, 2020, New Jersey Governor Phil Murphy announced that, in light of the COVID-19 pandemic, certain financial institutions have committed to provide New Jersey citizens with a 90-day residential mortgage forbearance and other similar financial relief.
The Court of Appeals of Washington recently taught litigants a stern message: you may want to consider a cross-appeal of any adverse ruling even if you are generally satisfied with the judgment of the lower court. See Nationstar Mortg. LLC v. Schultz, 2019 WL 6713614 (Wash. Ct. App. Dec. 10, 2019).
In response to the COVID-19 virus, lawmakers across the country are scrambling to pass a number of measures to blunt the ill effects of the pandemic to allow for real estate and loan closings. Specifically, New York Governor Andrew Cuomo has taken steps to enable “remote notarizations” in an effort to maintain social distancing practices.